Arguing for a Negligible Effect | Zendy

Rainey Carlisle | Zendy

AI Assistant Blog Pricing

Home ZAIA Blog

Premium

Arguing for a Negligible Effect

Author(s) -

Rainey Carlisle

Publication year - 2014

Publication title -

american journal of political science

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 6.347

H-Index - 170

eISSN - 1540-5907

pISSN - 0092-5853

DOI - 10.1111/ajps.12102

Subject(s) - argument (complex analysis) , simple (philosophy) , politics , epistemology , positive economics , variable (mathematics) , psychology , econometrics , political science , economics , mathematics , philosophy , chemistry , law , mathematical analysis , biochemistry

Political scientists often theorize that an explanatory variable should have “no effect” and support this claim by demonstrating that its coefficient's estimate is not statistically significant. This empirical argument is quite weak, but I introduce applied researchers to simple, powerful tools that can strengthen their arguments for this hypothesis. With several supporting examples, I illustrate that researchers can use 90% confidence intervals to argue against meaningful effects and provide persuasive evidence for their hypothesis.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research